The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Peterloo Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

133-137 Manchester Old Road, Middleton, Manchester, Greater Manchester, M24 4DZ (0161) 643 5005

Provided and run by:
Peterloo Medical Centre

All Inspections

29 November 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced assessment of Peterloo Medical Centre on 29 November 2023. The assessment focused on the responsive key question.

Following our previous inspection on 10 January 2019 the practice was rated good overall and for all key questions. The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Peterloo Medical Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

The practice continues to be rated as good overall and for providing safe, effective, caring and well led services as this was the rating given at the last comprehensive inspection. However, as a result of the findings of this focused assessment we have now rated the responsive key question as requires improvement.

Safe - Good

Effective - Good

Caring - Good

Responsive – Requires improvement.

Well-led - Good

Why we carried out this assessment.

We carried out this assessment as part of our work to understand how practices are working to try to meet demand for access and to better understand the experiences of people who use services and providers. We recognise the work that GP practices have been engaged in to continue to provide safe, quality care to the people they serve. We know colleagues are doing this while demand for general practice remains exceptionally high, with more appointments being provided than ever. In this challenging context, access to general practice remains a concern for people. Our strategy makes a commitment to deliver regulation driven by people’s needs and experiences of care. These assessments of the responsive key question include looking at what practices are doing innovatively to improve patient access to primary care and sharing this information to drive improvement.

How we carried out the assessment

This assessment was carried out remotely and did not include a site visit.

This included:

  • Conducting provider and staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Reviewing patient feedback form a variety of sources.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • Reviewing data we hold about the practice.
  • Seeking information form relevant stakeholders.

Our findings

We based our judgement of the responsive key question on a combination of:

  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We found that:

  • During the assessment process, the provider highlighted the efforts they are making or are planning to make to improve the responsiveness of the service for their patient population. The effect of these efforts are not yet reflected in patient feedback. Patient feedback was that they could not always access care and treatment in a timely way. Patients were dissatisfied with the arrangement for getting through to the practice by phone, appointment times offered and their experience of making an appointment.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Produce a plan as to how they intend to respond to patient concerns/feedback about access and their experience of making an appointment with an aim to improve patient experience.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Health Care

10 January 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Peterloo Medical Centre on 10 January 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • The practice strongly supported staff in their career development.
  • The practice, with other practices in the Clinical Commissioning Group and the wider NHS, had receptionists who were trained as care navigators who signposted patients to the right person at the right time across a variety of health services.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Ensure that all children who had failed attendances have their follow up recorded in their records.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

23 March 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Peterloo Medical Centre on 23 March 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • All staff employed by the practice had received a disclosure and barring check (DBS check). (DBS checks identify whether a person has a criminal record or is on an official list of people barred from working in roles where they may have contact with children or adults who may be vulnerable).
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

We saw several areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice used IPads when visiting patients which were linked to the clinical system which enabled the GP to view parts of the medical record. The GP was then able to send messages and requests such as blood tests. This ensured there were no delays in the request process.
  • They had a Lexicom application on their mobile phones, which is the system used for dictating referrals which enabled the GPs to request referrals when out of the surgery also ensuring there were no delays in the referral process.
  • The practice used Webex with a local pharmacy and were able to carry out face to face consultations using a computer link which meant the patient did not have to attend the surgery.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice